Group

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:13:14 -0500, Alan C wrote:

[...]

>SJ> a) what is the *scientific* evidence that convinces him (with checkable
>> references to primary sources, i.e. books and journals) that the Earth is
>> ~10,000 years old? and

AC>(..Answer skipped for lack of days and days and days to respond to such
>a general question..)

We have plenty of "days" here on CED.

And it is not "a general question" to ask a member of a C/E list, what is
the scientific evidence for their position.

But Alan is in good company. No YEC has ever answered that question on
CED (I have asked it many times), e.g.:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign/message/8386
From: "Stephen E. Jones" <sejones@...>
Date: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:36 pm
Subject: Re: YEC `fan mail' (was Your Stand)

Thanks to D.W. You mean well but you are simply *WRONG* if you
think the Universe and Earth are only ~10,000 years old. If they were, then
*all* the age data would be pointing to it (when in fact *no* age data is).

Then the `signal in the noise' would be *deafening* because: a) it is *one*
date; and b) it is so *recent*. It is not good enough that YEC picks on
problems with radiometric dating. YEC needs to produce its own evidence
showing *all* the age data converging on ~10,000 years ago. But in fact
*none* of it is. [...]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

See also:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign/message/5921
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign/message/5742
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign/message/5469
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign/message/5457
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign/message/3935
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign/message/3931

Usually YECs just unsubscribe, thereby `voting with their feet' that there is
*no* "scientific evidence that ... the Earth is ~10,000 years old"!

I hope Alan stays. He can rest assured that I won't pursue him on this, as:

1) my higher priority is writing my book "Problems of Evolution"
(http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/pe00cont.html &
http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/PoE00ToC.html), and

2) as an OEC/PC, I regard YECs as my fellow special creationist (see
tagline) *allies* in the struggle against our common *real* enemy,
materialistic-naturalistic evolution. We "progressive creationists and ...
young earth creationists agree on a key point: ... that natural processes and
ordinary providence are not adequate to explain the world. [We] ... both
fall into the category of supernatural creationists or special creationists."

But OTOH I won't `show Alan mine until he shows me his'! :-) That is, I
won't allow YECs to get away with their usual tactic of attacking their
opponent's position while keeping their position out of the ring, and then
jumping into the ring to claim victory if the opponent's position has
problems (since all positions have some problems), Asimov's "relativity of
wrong" applying:

"The young specialist in English Lit, having quoted me, went on to
lecture me severely on the fact that in *every* century people have
thought they understood the Universe at last, and in every century
they were proved to be wrong. It follows that the one thing we can
say about our modern `knowledge' is that it is *wrong*. ... This
particular thesis was addressed to me a quarter of a century ago by
John Campbell [a science fiction editor], who specialized in
irritating me. He also told me that all theories are proven wrong in
time. My answer to him was, `John, when people thought the Earth
was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was
spherical, they were wrong. But if *you* think that thinking the
Earth is spherical is *just as wrong* as thinking the Earth is flat,
then your view is wronger than both of them put together.' The
basic trouble, you see, is that people think that `right' and `wrong'
are absolute; that everything that isn't perfectly and completely
right is totally and equally wrong." (Asimov I., The Relativity of
Wrong," in "The Relativity of Wrong," [1988], Oxford University
Press: Oxford UK, 1989, reprint, pp.214-15. Emphasis in original)

IOW, if Alan (or any YEC) attacks my OEC/PC position, I will respond by asking
him the same question:

"what is the *scientific* evidence that ... the Earth is ~10,000 years old?"

[...]

Steve

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Creationism. General meaning: affirms that the universe is a
creation of God, and hence that a world-view such as naturalism is
untrue. Young earth creationism: the belief that the earth and
universe are less than about 15,000 years old. This is commonly
connected with the calendar day interpretation of Genesis 1. Some
adherents of the Calendar Day view, however, do not take a position
on the age of the earth; and some adherents of the other views do
not require that the earth be `old.' Old earth creationism:
creationism that allows that the natural sciences accurately conclude
that the universe is `old' (i.e. millions or even billions of years).
Two sub-categories of old-earth creationism: - theistic evolution:
belief that natural processes sustained by Gods ordinary providence
are Gods means of bringing about life and humanity. - progressive
creationism: belief that second causes sustained by Gods
providence are not the whole story, but that instead God has added
supernatural, creative actions to the process, corresponding to the
fiats of Genesis 1. Some confusion can arise because progressive
creationists vary in the degree of biological change they are willing
to countenance in between the creative events. The progressive
creationists and the young earth creationists agree on a key point:
namely that natural processes and ordinary providence are not
adequate to explain the world. They both fall into the category of
supernatural creationists or special creationists." ("Report of the
Creation Study Committee," Presbyterian Church in America:
Atlanta GA, 2000. http://www.pcanet.org/history/creation/report.html)
Stephen E. Jones, BSc (Biol.) http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones
Moderator: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign
& http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProblemsOfEvolution/
"Problems of Evolution" http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/pe00cont.html
& http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/PoE00ToC.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------